Re: applet and wireless scan

[yelo_3 <yelo_3 yahoo it>]

Thank you Dan for your information!!
I will do some tries and let you know if there are
problems with the refresh of the list.

I was complaining about the presence of ghost APs
because a user thinks that he can connect to it even
if he is not in range (6 minutes is still a lot. why
so much?)... anyway he has to wait for at least 1
minute to see that he cannot connect (then connection
timeout si tooooooo long :D even if it is immediately
visible that the connection can't be done because
there send-circle does not become green and stays
grey) and then the AP should be removed from the list.

Another scan problem is how nm handles the signal
level. in iwlist eth1 scan there are two values: one
misured in % and the other in dB. in my case if the
level is less than -80dB I cannot connect, even if the
other value is not so low (such as 25/100). which
problem do you think it can be? a driver issue?
nm-applet only shows the % value so it is possible
that the connection cannot be estabilished because the
other value is less than -80dB, but from nm this is
not visible...

As reguards the scan from console I didn't know that
in some cases it takes up to 10 seconds.. it is
instant with ipw2200! (and so it should be instant
with nm, shouldn't it? or is it introduces a sleep of
20 seconds independently?)

--- Dan Williams <dcbw redhat com> ha scritto:

> On Wed, 2007-03-07 at 20:25 +0100, yelo_3 wrote:
> > you told me that I should wait 10 seconds before
> > having an updated list. for me it is a great
> thing! is
> > the list updated even if it is open or should I
> close
> > and reopen it? is this feature in 0.7 or already
> in
> > 0.6.x?
> 
> NM scans every 20 seconds, and backs off to 2
> minutes.  If you pull down
> the menu, NM starts at 20 seconds again and backs
> off from there.
> 
> > why iwlist eth1 scan is so quick? is it
> inaccurate?
> 
> Because it blocks waiting for the scan results.  It
> is also highly
> driver dependent.  Some drivers take up to 10
> seconds to scan.
> 
> > and definitely I cannot understand why ghost APs
> are
> > kept for 6 minutes... this is quite confusing!
> 
> Because a single wireless scan, even with an
> ipw2200, will never give
> you a _complete_ picture of the wireless
> environment.  Radio is
> inherently unreliable.  Your card may fail to
> receive the beacon for an
> AP correctly, it may have collided with other
> traffic, etc.  The only
> reliable way to get a more complete picture of your
> radio environment is
> to do multiple scans and compile the results.
> 
> > especially in my case they are not purged if
> wireless
> > is off
> 
> rfkill isn't well supported under linux at the
> moment, and it's not
> reported to NetworkManager right now.  That's being
> worked on.
> 
> Dan
> 
> 
> 



	

	
		
___________________________________ 
L'email della prossima generazione? Puoi averla con la nuova Yahoo! Mail: 
http://it.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html